At least 20 more people were killed and 450 injured in Lebanon on Wednesday after a series of new explosions of wireless devices rocked the South, the Bekaa and the southern suburbs of Beirut, according to the Ministry of Health and the Lebanese Red Cross.
The unsaid implication of your loaded question is that the absence of a Palestinian state is “the fault of the Palestinians”. The further implication is that “Israel has no partner for peace” even now. Basically, the implication being we need to keep doing whatever the Israeli right wants in perpetuity.
If by some miracle you’re not just parroting right wing pro-Israeli talking points, please elaborate what the hell you mean with your question instead.
This is primarily a call to learn about the history of the conflict.
Palestinian political strategy and tactics have been moderately successful at best, IMHO. It’s worth knowing about them and their history. Black September and the role of Palestinian groups in the Lebanese civil war are also worth learning about to better understand the current situation.
Nice word salad. If you want people to learn more, say that (ideally also pointing to specific resources) instead of derailing discussions with open ended loaded questions.
Fascinating lack of good faith. Paired with your penchant for open ended leading questions, I’m ready to make the call: you’re trolling.
Edit: just to clarify by “word salad” I meant calling the Palestinians, i.e., a stateless, disposessed, oppressed, subject to apartheid, and genocided people… “moderately successful”. While at the same time making the assumption your interlocutor does not know the history. I mean, to be as polite a Greek as I can: go to the port and come back to tell me if the boats are bobbing.
On a land that didn’t belong to them. And in the process killed 15000 Palestinians and expelled 750.000 to create their dream ethno state. Prior to 1900 very few Jews were living there and the local population was mostly Arabs.
The League of Nations created a mandate for the foundation of a state for the Jews in the Levante. So there’s a basis in international law for it.
Most of the land on which Israel was founded in 1948 was state owned land and land owned by Jews they had purchased.
No Palestinian would have lost their land, if the partition plan would have been accepted. Instead they chose war and lost it.
Prior to 1900 the land was only sparsely populated in the first place.
More than 800,000 Jews were expelled from Arab and Muslim countries in the region and had to flee to Israel. It was a population exchange like India and Pakistan around the same time.
The Jewish Agency, the recognized representative of the Jewish community, accepted the plan, which assigned 55–56% of Mandatory Palestine to the Jews. At the time, the Jews were about a third of the population and owned around 6–7% of the land.
And then you wonder why Arabs weren’t happy. Would you be happy if someone comes to Germany and tells you from now on, 55% of Germany belongs to Turkiye?
But arguing with you and trying to show you the other point of view is like fighting with windmills.
A huge part of the land for the Jewish part was the Negev desert. And as I said most of the land in general was state owned. Lots of Jewish immigration was expected, which would quickly change the population disparity as well.
You can read the old documents about how they arrived at the plan on the UN’s website.
Why was there no independent state of Palestine established in 1949-1967?
You think that’s some kind of gotcha. It isn’t.
Would you care to elaborate?
The unsaid implication of your loaded question is that the absence of a Palestinian state is “the fault of the Palestinians”. The further implication is that “Israel has no partner for peace” even now. Basically, the implication being we need to keep doing whatever the Israeli right wants in perpetuity.
If by some miracle you’re not just parroting right wing pro-Israeli talking points, please elaborate what the hell you mean with your question instead.
This is primarily a call to learn about the history of the conflict.
Palestinian political strategy and tactics have been moderately successful at best, IMHO. It’s worth knowing about them and their history. Black September and the role of Palestinian groups in the Lebanese civil war are also worth learning about to better understand the current situation.
I already debunked this to you in another thread
https://lemmy.world/comment/12431134
Nice word salad. If you want people to learn more, say that (ideally also pointing to specific resources) instead of derailing discussions with open ended loaded questions.
Salad is good for you. I won’t provide sources as you will dismiss anything I link anyway. You have enough terms to start googling.
Fascinating lack of good faith. Paired with your penchant for open ended leading questions, I’m ready to make the call: you’re trolling.
Edit: just to clarify by “word salad” I meant calling the Palestinians, i.e., a stateless, disposessed, oppressed, subject to apartheid, and genocided people… “moderately successful”. While at the same time making the assumption your interlocutor does not know the history. I mean, to be as polite a Greek as I can: go to the port and come back to tell me if the boats are bobbing.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba
Nakba was in 1948. 1949-1967 Israel did not occupy the West Bank and Gaza. Why didn’t Palestinians establish a state then and there?
Why Jews didn’t forgive Nazis in 1946?!?
Jews founded a state of their own in 1948. Forgiveness of others is independent of building a safe home for your people.
On a land that didn’t belong to them. And in the process killed 15000 Palestinians and expelled 750.000 to create their dream ethno state. Prior to 1900 very few Jews were living there and the local population was mostly Arabs.
The League of Nations created a mandate for the foundation of a state for the Jews in the Levante. So there’s a basis in international law for it.
Most of the land on which Israel was founded in 1948 was state owned land and land owned by Jews they had purchased.
No Palestinian would have lost their land, if the partition plan would have been accepted. Instead they chose war and lost it.
Prior to 1900 the land was only sparsely populated in the first place.
More than 800,000 Jews were expelled from Arab and Muslim countries in the region and had to flee to Israel. It was a population exchange like India and Pakistan around the same time.
And then you wonder why Arabs weren’t happy. Would you be happy if someone comes to Germany and tells you from now on, 55% of Germany belongs to Turkiye?
But arguing with you and trying to show you the other point of view is like fighting with windmills.
A huge part of the land for the Jewish part was the Negev desert. And as I said most of the land in general was state owned. Lots of Jewish immigration was expected, which would quickly change the population disparity as well.
You can read the old documents about how they arrived at the plan on the UN’s website.